Hi,
Am 04.02.2012 19:13, schrieb Clint M Priest:
-----Original Message-----
From: Rasmus Schultz [mailto:ras...@mindplay.dk]
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 10:01 AM
To: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: [PHP-DEV] Re: internals Digest 4 Feb 2012 09:08:29 -0000 Issue 2549
Why can't the read-only and write-only keywords be implicit instead of explicit? I've
never seen another language where you have to explicitly indicate what you're doing.
At> best, it acts an extra fail-safe to prevent making errors - at worst, it just
means more redundant code to maintain, more ways to make errors. Do the benefits
really outweigh> the value of this?
The read-only and write-only keywords act a little differently. Without them,
attempting a set on an accessor without a setter defined will cause __set() to
be called whereas with the read-only it will produce an error. The inverse is
true for write-only. I attempted to keep the ability to have lazy
initializing of properties via accessors, but that could be written in php
slightly differently if the read-only/write-only keywords were not present (due
to guards). Doesn't particularly matter to me.
Just curious: Why? Whats the benefit in allowing "get" directly and
"set" via __set() at the same time?
Regarding automatic implementations - according to the wiki, the backing field
is implemented as public. Is that correct? Most other languages don't even
expose the
existence of the backing field. Would it not be more correct to implement an
auto-backing field as protected? The reason for implementing accessors in the
first place, is
usually to prevent direct access to an underlying field.
Makes sense, in C# these backing fields are completely inaccessible directly,
would that be even better in this case or would protected suffice?
Since a high degree of explicitness seems to be a design goal, it would
probably make more sense if you had to use reflection to access a backing-field
without invoking the
accessor-methods.
Looks nice otherwise! :-)
- Rasmus
2012/2/4<internals-digest-h...@lists.php.net>
From: Clint M Priest<cpri...@zerocue.com>
To: "internals@lists.php.net"<internals@lists.php.net>
Cc:
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 13:47:53 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Property Getters/Setters (v2.4) for review The
property accessor functionality is done and is detailed here:
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/propertygetsetsyntax-as-implemented
Core Patch:
http://www.clintpriest.com/patches/php-core/accessors/2.4.diff
The core patch encompasses the entire original RFC and the
as-implemented includes implementation details and edge cases not
defined by the original RFC.
Most changes are in zend_compile, zend_object_handlers and
zend_language_scanner.
Thanks,
-Clint
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
